Frederik Ramm schrieb:
Someone pushing a bike IS a pedestrian and thus isn't misusing a
footway.
Maybe I have not made myself clear (maybe the word push has some
meaning I didn't know about) but I meant someone walking next to his
bike!
Please, take my apologies, I got your statement
Alex Mauer schrieb:
The new highway value path has been approved. It received 31 votes,
22 in favor and 9 against, with 3 abstentions.
The new access value designated has been approved. It received 32
votes, 19 in favor and 13 against, with 2 abstentions
The deprecation of footway,
The new highway value path has been approved. It received 31 votes,
22 in favor and 9 against, with 3 abstentions.
The new access value designated has been approved. It received 32
votes, 19 in favor and 13 against, with 2 abstentions
The deprecation of footway, bridleway, and cycleway in
Karl Eichwalder wrote:
Define appropriate. Otherwise it cannot. A cycleway (Radweg)
is somethig very special in Germany (unfortunately). It does not
equal to a path where you are allowed to cycle. You are _forced_ to
make use of this way if it accompanies the street. Of course, here
in
Alex Mauer schrieb:
The access restrictions on the road (no bicycles if there is an
accompanying cycle route) don't affect the access on the cycle route
itself. Obviously legality of use by other modes of transportation will
vary by jurisdiction (In some places cycleway implies moped=yes,
Karl Eichwalder wrote:
Alex Mauer schrieb:
The access restrictions on the road (no bicycles if there is an
accompanying cycle route) don't affect the access on the cycle route
itself. Obviously legality of use by other modes of transportation will
vary by jurisdiction (In some places
On 2 Jun 2008, at 21:31, Alex Mauer wrote:
Karl Eichwalder wrote:
Alex Mauer schrieb:
The access restrictions on the road (no bicycles if there is an
accompanying cycle route) don't affect the access on the cycle
route
itself. Obviously legality of use by other modes of
Hi,
I would also like to see the value bicycle=dismount, for short
sections where cyclists have to dismount as part of the cycle network.
I should expect any good bike routing algorithm to consider footways
as well, with speed suitable for walking. I'm not aware of any footway
were you are
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Sent: 02 June 2008 10:30 PM
To: Shaun McDonald
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org; Alex Mauer
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Approved: path,designated. Rejected: *way
deprecation
Hi,
I would also like to see the value bicycle=dismount, for short
sections where cyclists have
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 2:30 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I would also like to see the value bicycle=dismount, for short
sections where cyclists have to dismount as part of the cycle network.
I should expect any good bike routing algorithm to consider footways
as well,
Shaun McDonald schrieb:
If the use of the cycle is required, and the only other path is the
road, then putting bicycle=no on the road will cause routing
algorithms for cyclists to push the cyclist to the adjacent cycleway.
This would be wrong in Germany. Using the road is not forbidden in
Andy Robinson \(blackadder-lists\) schrieb:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
I should expect any good bike routing algorithm to consider footways
as well, with speed suitable for walking. I'm not aware of any footway
were you are not allowed to push your bike.
Just start cycling next weekend, 50km and
12 matches
Mail list logo
